swift11... welcome to the Linuxmce community where you can have the best idea in the world but you won't be listened to until you make significant contributions. For better or for worse, it's very much a meritocracy.

sorry but i was a bit offended by "We should" instead of "one might want to consider..."

I've seen so many people here who think that developers should do this or do that.. I just wanted to point out that this is not how opensource works. Somebody needs code.. he writes it. He decides to make it open/free for others to be able to use and extend it, too. There is no democratic process or some kind of a voting system involved. Davegravy seems to also think it should be like that.

What does the fund provide?The Intel AppUp developer program Million Dollar Development Fund provides support to developers with the objective of reducing barrier to entry for new application development and accelerating time to market.

Who is eligible for the Intel AppUp developer program “Million Dollar Development Fund”?The development fund is available to individual and student developers as well as small, medium and large software companies who submit applications.

What is Intel AppUp developer program Accelerator 2010?Intel AppUp developer program Accelerator 2010 is a component of the Million Dollar Development Fund. Under this program, Intel will provide funding to software developers and companies looking to speed time to market for applications that bring new user experiences to netbook consumers.

Why is Intel launching Accelerator 2010?The netbook has become one of the most popular consumer devices in the market today, but its true potential has been limited by applications that are not optimized for its mobility and smaller screen size. Through Intel AppUp developer program Accelerator 2010, we are looking for breakthrough applications that demonstrate new user experiences designed for Intel Atom processor-based netbooks, show potential for significant growth and broad consumer appeal.

(1) it is a platform intended precisely for the appliance domain.(2) It wioluld allow us to construct a reference platform of known hardware that will be supported now and in the future, across two current processor architectures, X86 and ARM.

I have not backed down from this assesment, and I am saddened to see that so many see my thoughts as being narrow minded or short sighted. They're not. I am trying to mitigate as many of the flaws inherent in this stack as humanly possible, and I have spent almost two years thinking on this very subject so far,

how about the rest of you?

-Thom

Watching the development over the last two years I think that having clearly defined supported hardware would help aide adoption as long as the hardware is as reasonably priced (if it isn't and people are forced to move to new hardware due to an architecture change current users will get frusterated and new users will be terrified by the price point). Much of the home automation items I've found are relatively expensive (zwave switches, existing home security alarm IP integration, etc). On the flip side, I know that over the last year alot of fantastic strides have been made by the project community to help show support interoperability in the wiki by adding the supportabiliy matrix to each article, and users post their current setup on the user section.

As a relatively new person in the arena of programming, I don't fully grasp what would be required from a programming standpoint to migrate the LMCE code base from a Kubuntu OS to the Meego mobile OS though I do understand that developer time on this project is a very precious commodity and if a significant amount of effort is entailed with end user purchasing requirements the decision must be made carefully.

Personally I've gone back and forth about the hardware issue: unless you know of someone (either personally or via the wiki) who has tried and tested whatever you happen to be looking at, you're rolling the dice on whether the hardware will integrate successfully with MCE. Though on the flip side I enjoy the spirit of challenge that's associated with the 'open-ness' of the platform and applications. I also enjoy that with a few stipulations (stick with nvidia graphics controllers and intel/amd cpus) you should be able to get most if not all hardware working if you're willing to step up to the challenge. I've had more than one evening of utter frustration banging my head against a piece of hardware not understanding where the issue was (the UIRT comes to mind, and a pesky NIC issue I had a while back) but these items helped grow my ability to troubleshoot and understand the architecture more.

I believe it comes down to market - what is the goal or target audience of the project at this point in time? To gather developer interest, to gather as many (layman) users as possible or to gather more technical users who don't mind pushing themselves to jump in the code? I'm thinking all of those sound good, but there's always a priority, what's top priority? Whatever it ends up being, hopefully that helps to cast some light on an answer.

I believe it comes down to market - what is the goal or target audience of the project at this point in time? To gather developer interest, to gather as many (layman) users as possible or to gather more technical users who don't mind pushing themselves to jump in the code? I'm thinking all of those sound good, but there's always a priority, what's top priority? Whatever it ends up being, hopefully that helps to cast some light on an answer.

I'm happy to hear you speaking in terms of priorities.

If I were an interested developer, would I know where to focus my efforts (The Roadmap Wiki link above that I'm looking at is broken, for example)? Would I develop whatever aspect of Linuxmce seemed interesting to me, personally, instead of focusing on common goal(s)?

What do you end up with when you have a bunch of developers doing their own thing? Will the end product be disjointed?

as long as there is no specific supporting business behind a project, I as an open source developer (poohh, what a statement, /me a dev, and OSS dev never the less...), work on the stuff, I like to work on. And I got the feeling, most people in the -devel channel do the same thing.

This does not mean, the project will be disjointed, on the contrary. We test each others stuff, we talk about each others stuff. That's how we get progress.

A very good example is los93sol's work on the asterisk problems. He started using the telecom part of the system, and could not stand the issues. So he learned about asterisk, the dialplan, and so on, talked in -devel about his findings, and about the way he would fix things, and everybody took turns in shooting down his ideas. But he prevailed AND fixed a lot of bugs in doing so.

To go back in time, before the 710 release, I wanted to get the Maemo orbiter more easily installable. So I went ahead, and build deb packages (after spending a week or so trying to understand things (I am a very slow learner)), and in the end, we had a maemo Orbiter, people could install by selecting it from a web site.